MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409577636 · doi:10.1016/j.jobe.2025.112661

An agent-based framework for prioritizing building retrofits

2025· article· en· W4409577636 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Khosro Lari, Kevin Cant, Ralph Evins

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Building Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Planning and Valuation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceConstruction engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the urgency to address climate change grows, municipalities face the challenge of lowering carbon emissions from buildings, which account for a large portion of total emissions. However, many cities lack the tools and data required to develop effective policies. This study proposes a practical framework for solving this by creating a user-friendly dashboard tailored to the needs of decision-makers in municipalities. The framework analyses current energy consumption, carbon emissions and building characteristics by leveraging existing datasets such as energy assessment databases and the property tax databases. Decision-makers can visualize the potential impact of various retrofit alternatives using scenario analysis and policy simulation, anticipate future construction rates and analyze the embodied carbon impact. The framework provides insights into the current carbon status and targets and enables municipalities to effectively identify and prioritize climate solutions. This paper applies the framework to single-family houses in the City of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, however its flexibility enables adaption to other contexts around the world. This study adds to the expanding discussion about municipal climate action by proposing a practical, comprehensive approach to inform policy decisions and expedite progress towards carbon reduction targets. • A data-driven framework for municipal carbon reduction strategies. • Combines building assessment and property tax data for detailed emissions analysis. • Uses agent-based modeling to simulate real-world retrofitting behaviors. • Features a dashboard for policymakers to model retrofit scenarios interactively. • Prioritizes retrofits by actual energy-saving potential for tailored interventions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Building EngineeringSame topicUrban Planning and ValuationFrench-language works237,207